After a year of controversy off the track, with contentious decisions on all sides, no end to a minefield of politics within the sport and some highly controversial comments and attitudes - Is it time for Max Mosley to tender his resignation?

The fact I think he should go is influenced by the length of time he has served, rather than by his record. It´s unhealthy to have one person holding the reigns of power for the length of time Max has. I also feel a younger person might bring fresh ideas that would benefit the sport. At the moment it´s getting bogged down with red tape.

I think anyone who hasn't done so yet needs to take a second look at Max's latest interview. Hmmm. Surely that kind of relationship with a team principal raises a conflict of interests - at the highest level of the sport!

Not really, he is very honest and fair: "But should we find it necessary to impose our technical or sporting regulations, than[sic] Ferrari is treated like any other team." He even gives an example to prove his point.

Originally posted by Tigershark Not really, he is very honest and fair: "But should we find it necessary to impose our technical or sporting regulations, than[sic] Ferrari is treated like any other team." He even gives an example to prove his point.

Yes but the point is, when it comes to the FIA is imposing its regulations on other teams, can we be sure they aren't being guided by Ferrari? Or that those outcomes don't unduly favor one team over another due to this 'special' relationship?

please, mr Mango... if you think this is important, then DO something about it, dont organize polls. go to your countrys FIA office and talk with persons who CAN do something - however little - about it.

Originally posted by BlackCat please, mr Mango... if you think this is important, then DO something about it, dont organize polls. go to your countrys FIA office and talk with persons who CAN do something - however little - about it.

Well, I may actually do just that. I thought it was important to gather popular opinion first, so that the governing body can start to feel the weight of the sports supporters.

Originally posted by ATM_Andy A proper answer would have been: No, ALL F1 teams are equally important to the show/sport. Spiker and Super Aguri are as important as Mclaren and Ferrari.

It would have also been false. Spyker is not as important to F1 as McLaren and Ferrari, which is why nobody really cares if they change their drivers twice to pay of debts or change names every season.

Originally posted by Tigershark It would have also been false. Spyker is not as important to F1 as McLaren and Ferrari, which is why nobody really cares if they change their drivers twice to pay of debts or change names every season.

You really are missing the point Tigershark.

Remember this isn't an F1 historian speaking, nor an F1 media manager or advertising exec... This is the head of the governing body, who is in charge of fairly and impartially upholding the the regulations of the sport. If that is seen to be (or indeed is) bias in any way, that is when fan's and competitors alike get angry, and the sport starts it break down.

Remember this isn't an F1 historian speaking, nor an F1 media manager or advertising exec... This is the head of the governing body, who is in charge of fairly and impartially upholding the the regulations of the sport. If that is seen to be (or indeed is) bias in any way, that is when fan's and competitors alike get angry, and the sport starts it break down.

Jim

Spot on

Spyker was once Jordan and between 1994 and 2002 were never lower than sixth and was as high as third in the WCC. There's nothing to say that with the right regulations they could not be third again one day.

Welome Jim,
You see, the Ferrari fanboys will protect Max to the death. That is why they will attack you for suggesting that Max needs to go; even though Max himself said that he should not be in position longer than two terms. Of course he said that long ago.

Great thread, couldn't agree more with you and in this case a younger Max; two terms then get out.

Yes but the point is, when it comes to the FIA is imposing its regulations on other teams, can we be sure they aren't being guided by Ferrari? Or that those outcomes don't unduly favor one team over another due to this 'special' relationship?

Jim

Yes, we can be sure that Ferrari sets the rules based on their budget and their marketing campaign. Has been like that for at least 10 years. Every rule change in the last 10 years has been made to keep Ferrari competitive so in not to run them out of business. V8's, tyre changes, everything. Very very sad. The modern plague of F1, Ferrari and Max.

Originally posted by Jim Mango This is the head of the governing body, who is in charge of fairly and impartially upholding the the regulations of the sport. If that is seen to be (or indeed is) bias in any way, that is when fan's and competitors alike get angry, and the sport starts it break down.Jim

Max Mosley says Ferrari is more important because "it holds a historically important position". There is no arguing with this, apart from the degree in which you believe Max to think Ferrari is more important. McLaren and Williams have also been in F1 longer than many of it's fans and supporters have been alive, and if Max were to make a list I have no reaso to doubt they would be close behind Ferrari.

The second point Mosley makes is that he wants to make sure Formula One does not become, or get the image of being, a British run and British won championship. Look no further than the Tour de France, where the ongoing investigations against Lance Armstrong were seen and reported worldwide as a French grudge against the American. Or the Soccer World Cup, where what I believe was considered an outsider team like South Korea suddenly did fantastic in the tournament once it was held in their own country. Such an image is very bad for an international, and indeed exceedingly non-European championship. Without teams like Ferrari that attract and get a worldwide audience excited, Formula One runs the risk of becoming either a series like Grand Prix 2, or another British championship only watched in the Commonwealth. Of course I am exaggerating, but it's Mosley's job to prevent the situation from coming even close to this.

He finishes his answer with a reassurance to people that this does not in fact mean Ferrari is favoured: "But should we find it necessary to impose our technical or sporting regulations, than Ferrari is treated like any other team."

Based on Max's answer, Spyker should indeed be the most important team in F1 ; it's the only Dutch team in a sport where the commercial rights holder, president, race director etc are all British. Spyker alone is standing up for Dutch interests.

Max says : " stay in close contact with Ferrari to assure them that no British ‘mafia’ or cartel tries to take advantage of them"

Does he do the same thing for Spyker ? Does he do the same for Renault, as the only French team ? No he does not. He is giving Ferrari preferential treatment and loftier status, and says as much in his own words.

This is not acceptable behaviour. Even if he is being even-handed, it is not transparently so, and his office should be carried out in a manner that is above reproach.

Originally posted by Tigershark The second point Mosley makes is that he wants to make sure Formula One does not become, or get the image of being, a British run and British won championship.

But to do this by having a 'special' relationship with one Italian team is just so flawed. They should do this by establishing good checks and balances, enabling complete impartiality to any team or driver regardless of nationality or historic status.

A good start would be to see that a president doesnt become too entrenched (Max's own two term idea sounds great!) and has some sort of appropriate accountability when it comes to his/her own relationships with key figures in the sport.

Originally posted by Jim Mango But to do this by having a 'special' relationship with one Italian team is just so flawed. They should do this by establishing good checks and balances, enabling complete impartiality to any team or driver regardless of nationality or historic status.

I can't properly judge if Mosley is too involved in his relation with Ferrari, but I'm all for making the organisation more transparent and having a professional system of people who are accountable for what they do. Absolutely, and I agree that there should indeed be a maximum amount of years for any position of influence.

Improvements are possible, but Mosley has a very difficult position and I guess that as long as he's getting an equal amount of complaints from Spain, Germany, Italy, and Britain he's doing a pretty decent job.

imagine that there were only one British team and all other teams were Italian, that the commercial rights holder was Italian, as was the FIA President, the race director and his assistant and the sport’s commissioner. Wouldn’t it be understandable that this team would be very careful? I therefore use my neutrality with a huge amount of responsibility and stay in close contact with Ferrari to assure them that no British ‘mafia’ or cartel tries to take advantage of them.

Why isn't this also the case for Toyota or BMW, both of which are based wholly outside of Britain also? You could also argue (less successfully, probably) that Renault, Super Aguri, and Honda deserve some assurance too.

But in actual fact the teams that really need the assurance, the teams that could really do with a bit of FIA TLC, are the independents; Williams, Force India, and Prodrive. They are essentially at the mercy of the manufacturers who otherwise control the tech groups.

Originally posted by Buttoneer But in actual fact the teams that really need the assurance, the teams that could really do with a bit of FIA TLC, are the independents; Williams, Force India, and Prodrive. They are essentially at the mercy of the manufacturers who otherwise control the tech groups.

Mosley raised this issue in the TV series aired by, amongst others I guess, BBC World called 'Formula for Success'. He emphasized the importance of support and reassurance for the independent teams because they were, if financially possible, going to stick around forever while the big manufacturers could pull out at any moment if the situation was not benefiting them.

Originally posted by Tigershark Mosley raised this issue in the TV series aired by, amongst others I guess, BBC World called 'Formula for Success'. He emphasized the importance of support and reassurance for the independent teams because they were, if financially possible, going to stick around forever while the big manufacturers could pull out at any moment if the situation was not benefiting them.

Well that's good news at least. It's a shame he didn't reiterate that view in the interview we are discussing here really. His reply was never going to go down well with many (including me) and it just reinforces entrenched opinions.

The man is a fool, really, and it would probably be right to hang all his criticism of Stewart right back on Mosley...

Well, I was deliberatly steering clear of his family history... I don't think it is fair to bring it into this context, because it is easy for people to simply label him a racist and that isn't really helpful.

What I was refering to was his comments in the Motorsport press in the past.

Originally posted by Jim Mango A thats the thing... He thinks he is a politician - but he isn't. He seems to revel in turning everything into politics and I think thats part of the reason we have had a year like this.

Its a shame, I think he did a good job in his first couple of years, but now its seems to have fallen drunk with the power.

Jim

Yes, that's his vice. While Berne's fix is the money, Max's is power and prestige, and he wallows in it; I find it hard to believe he'll ever be able to give it up - and he changed the rules of election so to make it almost impossible for anyone to challenge him until he is ready to give it up. F1 deserves to be run by people passionate about motorsport, but it's not and nor is it ever likely to be. Still, I voted for Mosley out because, even if we have to settle with a pseudo-politician heading the FIA, we could still do with someone less vindictive and less supercilious than Mosley.

You've got to hand it to him though, he's one mixed up man.
His duplicitous behaviour has been comical this year.

WHAT?
Not mention his family?
Sorry...it's just too hysterically ironic to avoid.

He was an election agent for his father's Union Movement [Euro-fascist] party after the war, he then became interested in becoming a Tory MP but finally switched allegiance to Labour after meeting John Smith. Map that political journey!

His mother, Diana Mitford, had a diamond swastika in her retinue and claimed to have adored Hitler. Meanwhile, dad Oswald stood for election in the 1960s on a political platform that emphasised the sexual deviance of black people.

So he's a fascist, turned Tory, turned new/old Labour supporter who grew up in a household that held Hitler in high esteem and that saw black people as criminals and perverts.

I'm no analyst but that's got to be worth a book. Trouble is, if you started writing it his friend would most probably send around some 'associates' to break your typewriter. Most likely over your head.

e was an election agent for his father's Union Movement [Euro-fascist] party after the war, he then became interested in becoming a Tory MP but finally switched allegiance to Labour after meeting John Smith. Map that political journey!

His mother, Diana Mitford, had a diamond swastika in her retinue and claimed to have adored Hitler. Meanwhile, dad Oswald stood for election in the 1960s on a political platform that emphasised the sexual deviance of black people.

So he's a fascist, turned Tory, turned new/old Labour supporter who grew up in a household that held Hitler in high esteem and that saw black people as criminals and perverts.

I'm no analyst but that's got to be worth a book. Trouble is, if you started writing it his friend would most probably send around some 'associates' to break your typewriter. Most likely over your head.

Well I'm sure Oswald would be disgusted about how much of an evil, nasty, twisted and corrupt man his son turned out to be HeHeHe...

Originally posted by jonpollak He was an election agent for his father's Union Movement [Euro-fascist] party after the war, he then became interested in becoming a Tory MP but finally switched allegiance to Labour after meeting John Smith. Map that political journey!

OK, so now max is starting to suggest that Hamilton is bad for the sport.

Although I am aware that the press may be trying to extrapolate to much from this interview but surely the only thing that salvaged this season from political farce was the three way title fightout and the excitement of the Alonso/Hamilton battle?

And Maclaren starting next season with a negative point allocation?Doesnt he realise that this will probably do more to tarnish the soprt and turn off fans than the spying its self?

Originally posted by Lazarus II Welome Jim, You see, the Ferrari fanboys will protect Max to the death. That is why they will attack you for suggesting that Max needs to go; even though Max himself said that he should not be in position longer than two terms. Of course he said that long ago.

Rubbish,

I for example said since years that Max should go, probably since 1999 or so.

Mosley undoubtedly revealed to me why he should go, when he proudly announced that the FiA has more money available for road safety campaings than certain countries. But to this day I never have witnessed anyone from the FiA involved with road safety projects.

Also my reasons have also to do with the rules we have today. Alternatively to Max retirement, have next to the FOM and FiA a third body, that is solely responsible for the racing aspect of the sport. An agency who is not concerned about safety at all. Especailly with the FiA, that should balance each other out.

Originally posted by HP Mosley undoubtedly revealed to me why he should go, when he proudly announced that the FiA has more money available for road safety campaings than certain countries. But to this day I never have witnessed anyone from the FiA involved with road safety projects.

The aims of the campaign appear to be less aimed at the green cross code or tufty club end of the market but making sure that developing companies give due regard for road safety as they put their new and uprated infrastructures in place. It's all about lobbying rather than lokking left and right as you cross.